Four words are added to section 3(2) of the 2016 Act
To clarify the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016, to appropriately limit the application of defenses based on the passage of time and other non-merits defenses to claims under that Act, section 2, Sec. 2.
Written by .
Four words are added to section 3(2) of the 2016 Act
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“in section 3(2), by inserting "and other non-merits defenses" after "statutes of limitation"”
An insertion into section 3(2) of the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016 (22 U.S.C. 1621 note). The words and other non-merits defenses are placed after the words statutes of limitation. What the rest of section 3(2) says is not stated in this law.
What the document actually says
“in section 3(2), by inserting "and other non-merits defenses" after "statutes of limitation"”
That sentence, in plain words
It adds four words to another part of the old law. The words are 'and other non-merits defenses'.
What this is about
A merits defense is about the facts of the case. A non-merits defense is not. It is a reason to end a case for some other cause.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2025, Public Law 119-82, sec. 2, 140 Stat. 752 (2026). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-119publ82/html/PLAW-119publ82.htm
This page
“Four words are added to section 3(2) of the 2016 Act,” Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2025, section 2, Sec. 2. Read the Mandate, https://readthemandate.org/holocaust-expropriated-art-recovery-act-2025/proposal/sec02-section-3-non-merits-defenses/ (retrieved October 10, 2026).
Cite the document when the claim is about what the document says. Cite this page when the indexing, the wording or the record of what has happened is what is being relied on.
How to Read This Page
The quotation is the document's own words, exactly as printed, checked against the page
number against the Act itself before publishing. The paragraph underneath is our summary,
not the document's words. So is the plain English version, which is why it sits beside the
quotation rather than replacing it.
